{"id":349,"date":"2008-01-12T13:24:28","date_gmt":"2008-01-12T18:24:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/emergenceweb.com\/blog\/?p=349"},"modified":"2008-01-12T13:24:28","modified_gmt":"2008-01-12T18:24:28","slug":"andrew-mcafee-est-il-le-messiesuite-et-fin","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/emergenceweb.com\/blog\/2008\/01\/andrew-mcafee-est-il-le-messiesuite-et-fin\/","title":{"rendered":"Andrew McAfee est-il le messie…(suite et fin)"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u00c0 la suite du Webinar<\/a> d’hier sur l’entreprise 2.0, je suis retourn\u00e9 sur le blogue de Fastfoward<\/a> pour lire les r\u00e9actions et commentaires sur la nature du d\u00e9bat Davenport-McAfee. En voici une amusante sur la notion de contr\u00f4le de la part des gestionnaires :\u00abThey have already LOST control of the message. They need to get over the command & control idea. It\u2019s nonexistent.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Beaucoup de commentaires ont cependant port\u00e9 et gravit\u00e9 autour de la notion de gestion du savoir ou Knowledge Management. Je voudrais ainsi vous rapporter les deux commentaires les plus pertinents sur ce sujet crucial et \u00e9crits par nuls autres que Bill Ives<\/a> et Jon Husband<\/a>, tous deux pr\u00e9sents au Webinar. Tout d’abord Bill :<\/p>\n

\u00abI think that most of the successful KM applications were workflow aligned and when KM was a separate document repository outside of business processes, it was much less successful. Then it became managing knowledge rather than supporting work. I think there is a parallel with web 2.0. Tom seemed to use the blog or wiki outside a work process as a strawman. Many of the documented success stories in enterprise 2.0 have been when a team replaced email with web 2.0 type tools (rather they be blogs, wikis or some of the newer workflow apps that have emerged). When web 2.0 or enterprise 2.0 tools are aligned with workflow to make process and participation more transparent and more efficient there are documented business benefits. I know team workspaces have existed for some time but they did not have the same impact. Blog as speaking platform can work in the right situation but web 2.0 as project enablement works most of the time. \u00bb<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Et ensuite Jon en r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 Bill :<\/p>\n

\u00abI think that most of the successful KM applications were workflow aligned and when KM was a separate document repository outside of business processes, it was much less successful. Then it became managing knowledge rather than supporting work. I think there is a parallel with web 2.0.<\/em><\/p>\n

Yes. The Enterprise 2.0 environment (for shorthand purposes here.. I personally am not too hung up about whether something should be called 2.0 or not) characterized by the tools (wikis, blogs, RSS, etc.) provides the \u201cconnectivity\u201d called for in KM theory. It was called for in KM theory, but not so much addressed in (generally) KM implementation initiatives. Much of what was addressed by KM over the past decade was the architecture and functionality of taxonomies, database, info retrieval capability, re-use of knowledge \u201cobjects\u201d and so on. This fit better, at that time, with the prevailing management-science derived mindset efficiency as a primary driver of productivity. <\/em><\/p>\n

The aspect(s) of KM that was less addressed back then (and brought up in the McAfee \/ Davenport dialog) was the access to and use of collaboration practices, tools and the embedding of those in ongoing work design. Back then this was the province of organizational development theory and practice. As a work design practitioner, I can assure you that collaboration was not widely discussed in most workplaces until the late 90\u2019s. Previous work design involved separating and segmenting knowledge and accountability (take a look at any of the most-widely-used job evaluation schemes, job evaluation being the assessment of how a job is designed and where it belongs in an organization\u2019s designed structure). Yes, there were books and workshops about organizational culture, and (starting in the early 90\u2019s) more and more books and pronouncements about learning and ongoing change and the importance of effective leadership.<\/em><\/p>\n

BUT \u2026 the tools and web services that underly what we are calling Web 2.0 have begun to enable more easily, more widely and more ubiquitously the kinds of things that OD theory and practice called for but were only able to work with as \u201cinterventions\u201d, as attempts to make smallish changes to work processes, to the why-and-how of people doing work in a highly organized and highly structured setting.<\/em><\/p>\n

I think this is why there has been so much talk back-and-forth about emergence versus architected work design. We are coming from an era where it was highly architected using one dominant model in which people would talk and exchange and share and do all the things that are now accessible with social software in connected environments .. but they would do this outside the formal architected environment. It went on, and it was the grease, the enabling mechanism .. it just wasn\u2019t visible as \u201cwork\u201d .. except in the arenas where it was acceptable, the less-defined and higher-value \u201cknowledge work\u201d, or in other words, the stuff senior managers and executives did ( talk in meetings, sharing questions and viewpoints and other sources of information and knowledge about something or other).<\/em><\/p>\n

The era we are moving into lets more people do more of this .. and it does not fit easily into the ways that we still design work. The \u201cconnectivity\u201d afforded by social software and a much more highly interconnected (tools, infrastructure and people ) environment will keep teaching us more and more about the need for new ways to design work.<\/em><\/p>\n

It\u2019s been building up and coming at us for a long time. The connectivity was essentially missing, or was not the first part of KM theory to be addressed a decade or so ago. Social computing in the workplace, what was called KM previously and enterprise 2.0 (whatever it is and will become) belong together, in my opinion. <\/em><\/p>\n

The combination will have a large impact on organizational sociology. I would bet that how we design work will change a great deal in the next 5 to 10 years. The impact I suggest on organizational sociology has also been building up and coming at us for a couple of decades .. check out how management and leadership development curricula have changed (and not changed) over the past three decades.\u00bb<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

J’aime bien le dernier paragraphe de la r\u00e9flexion de Jon qui am\u00e8ne la notion de sociologie organisationnelle<\/a> et qui lie KM et 2.0 aux changements fondamentaux \u00e0 survenir au cours des prochaines ann\u00e9es au sein des entreprises, 2.0 ou pas. Des changements que j’ai associ\u00e9s dans mon billet pr\u00e9c\u00e9dent \u00e0 l’arriv\u00e9e des nouvelles g\u00e9n\u00e9rations 2.0 et 3D (la g\u00e9n\u00e9ration Y et la NetGen). \u00c0 ce sujet, \u00c9ric Blot<\/a> se demandait en commentaire :<\/p>\n

\u00abMais pour que les g\u00e9n\u00e9rations 2.0 et 3D imposent une nouvelle fa\u00e7on de se comporter dans l’entreprise, ne devons nous pas attendre qu’ils vieillissent un peu eux aussi et prennent v\u00e9ritablement les commandes des postes cl\u00e9s de nos entreprises\u00a0\u00a0 ?\u00bb<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\u00c0 cette interrogation, je r\u00e9ponds par la n\u00e9gative. Comme le dit Jon, ils vont profond\u00e9ment marquer la sociologie organisationnelle au cours des 5 \u00e0 10 prochaines ann\u00e9es. Les services RH appr\u00e9hendent un choc culturel et g\u00e9n\u00e9rationnel et sont pr\u00e9sentement avides de solutions pour contrer ce ph\u00e9nom\u00e8ne. La vague, que dis-je, le Tsunami de d\u00e9parts \u00e0 la retraite d’ici 2014 et le renouvellement de cette main d’oeuvre va forcer la hi\u00e9rarchie traditionnelle \u00e0 s’adapter. Le changement de paradigme est l\u00e0 ! Avant, quand la vague du BabyBoom a investi les entreprises, hommes et femmes ont adh\u00e9r\u00e9 au\u00a0 mod\u00e8le hi\u00e9rarchique traditionnel. Comme le disait un manager fran\u00e7ais \u00e0 qui j’en ai d\u00e9j\u00e0 parl\u00e9 : \u00abDonnez-leur an an et vous verrez, ils auront int\u00e9gr\u00e9 le moule.<\/em>\u00bb Tu peux bien manifester et avoir les cheveux longs \u00e0 l’\u00e9cole mais au bureau c’est complet-cravate et cheveux courts. Tu commences en bas de l’\u00e9chelle, tu te b\u00e2tis une carri\u00e8re, tu accumules l’information et les contacts et tu gravis les \u00e9chelons de la hi\u00e9rarchie en partageant le moins possible parce que l’information, c’est le pouvoir.<\/p>\n

Ce mod\u00e8le traditionnel bas\u00e9 sur la comp\u00e9tition interne est pr\u00e9sentement mis \u00e0 mal par les \u00abpetits nouveaux\u00bb de la g\u00e9n\u00e9ration Y. Ces derniers se foutent bien de la \u00abculture d’entreprise\u00bb. Ils sont mobiles et veulent non seulement une qualit\u00e9 de vie mais aussi une qualit\u00e9 de travail. Un travail bas\u00e9 sur autre chose que la comp\u00e9tition et le semaine officieuse de 70 heures. C’est pour cette raison que j’avais conclu qu’ils allaient imposer<\/strong> \u00e0 l\u2019entreprise leurs valeurs, leur mode de vie, leur fa\u00e7on de voir le travail, leur fa\u00e7on de collaborer et leurs outils pour le faire.<\/p>\n

Et que je disais que la vieille hi\u00e9rarchie n\u2019a qu\u2019\u00e0 bien se tenir car une autre et \u00e0 la veille de na\u00eetre et Jon Husband en parle depuis d\u00e9j\u00e0 quelques ann\u00e9es : la Wirearchy<\/a>. Une relation \u00e0 l\u2019autorit\u00e9 beaucoup plus inclusive, moins autoritaire, plus participative et non directive. Une entreprise plus horizontale que verticale et branch\u00e9e non seulement sur les technologies mais sur la cr\u00e9ativit\u00e9 de ce que l\u2019on appelle encore aujourd\u2019hui et de fa\u00e7on tr\u00e8s 1.0, son \u00abcapital humain\u00bb.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u00c0 la suite du Webinar d’hier sur l’entreprise 2.0, je suis retourn\u00e9 sur le blogue de Fastfoward pour lire les r\u00e9actions et commentaires sur la nature du d\u00e9bat Davenport-McAfee. En voici une amusante sur la notion de contr\u00f4le de la part des gestionnaires :\u00abThey have already LOST control of the message. They need to get over the command & control idea. It\u2019s nonexistent.\u00bb Beaucoup de commentaires ont cependant port\u00e9 et gravit\u00e9 autour de la notion de gestion du savoir ou Knowledge Management. Je voudrais ainsi vous rapporter les deux commentaires les plus pertinents sur ce sujet crucial et \u00e9crits par nuls autres que Bill Ives et Jon Husband, tous deux pr\u00e9sents au Webinar. Tout d’abord Bill : \u00abI think that most of the successful KM applications were workflow aligned and when KM was a separate document repository outside of business processes, it was much less successful. Then it became managing knowledge rather than supporting work. I think there is a parallel with web 2.0. Tom seemed to use the blog or wiki outside a work process as a strawman. Many of the documented success stories in enterprise 2.0 have been when a team replaced email with web 2.0 type tools […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[7,10,3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-349","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-communication-interactive","category-entreprise-20","category-evenements"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/emergenceweb.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/349"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/emergenceweb.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/emergenceweb.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emergenceweb.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emergenceweb.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=349"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/emergenceweb.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/349\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/emergenceweb.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=349"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emergenceweb.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=349"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emergenceweb.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=349"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}